Counts by stars

[Woodsa]

I am not familiar with college sports recruiting as that was an area I was never blessed with as my boys got my size. :-(

Are the number of stars, by level (5, 4, 3, 2, 1), predetermined each year? Are the counts consistent year over year or do they fluctuate to reflect the available talent?

Obviously there are limited nbr of 5 and 4 star athletes, but where are most of the HS talent ranked? No stars, 1-2 stars, 3 stars?

At work, they use a bell curve where 20% are above expectstions and 60% meet expectations.

I see headlines ststing this or thet star athlete is visiting but without some conext, not sure to be excited or worried?

I understands the stars dont make the athlete, so just keeping the discussion on star counts.

 

[Wolegib]

I was wondering the same thing. I know what they represent. However, is there a certain number of 5 and 4 and 3 star ratings they give out? I.e. are there only 20 5 star athlete ratings given out no matter how much talent there is? and is a 5 star athlete the same caliber every year?

 

[NVboiler]

Good questions. I also find this topic interesting. Unfortunately, it seems if a prospect is signed by Purdue their rating may go down, and one previously signed by Purdue go up if they choose a higher rated school.

 

[Woodsa]

Yes, I think we can agree that "stars" dont equate to "talent".

 

[pboiler18]

I think stars are even less important in the transfer portal era. Charlie Jones a 2 star as a recruit and then a 3 star as a transfer Yeah right!

 

[Chi-Boiler]

What I'm mostly sure of is that there is a rating system for a player. I want to say it is 1-100 but I suppose certain services have different standards. A rating above a certain benchmark makes a player a certain star, and furthermore, a "high" certain star for someone near the top of the range. Some years have more 5 stars than other years because it's the rating that drives the star. I'm sure it inherently creates a bell curve model, but the model doesn't drive the ratings. Players' ratings can also change over time, but it seems like that's more prevalent in basketball.

I'm no expert, so if others can rebut any of this please do.

 

[ANDY597]

There are a certain amount of 5 stars given out i think its 30 or 40

 

[Nappanee]

You can flip through 24 years of Rival rankings here.
It is not the same number of 5-star, etc, players per year.

 

[pboiler18]

There are a certain amount of 5 stars given out i think its 30 or 40

The person above you had it correct…there are as many 5 stars as meet the criteria. Could be 0, could be a million. Most of the time it is 30-40 but some years it’s far less.

 

[pulax78]

5-stars are projected 1st round draft picks.

 

[Wolegib]

I do recall it was once said the star ratings were supposed to rate a player’s readiness to play rather than their future potential . A 5 star rated recruit was supposed to have the skills, talent and body to be an immediate starter. A 5 star recruit was thought to be an immediate contributor as a freshman.

Obviously that would be different depending on where the player went. One example is Arch Manning. He didn’t start at Texas as a freshman, but supposedly his rating indicated he could start if he went somewhere else. If Manning had come to Purdue, He probably would have started, much like Jeff George.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

5-stars are projected 1st round draft picks.

For example, George Karlaftis, was both.

 

[cillerdo]

I am not familiar with college sports recruiting as that was an area I was never blessed with as my boys got my size. :-(

Are the number of stars, by level (5, 4, 3, 2, 1), predetermined each year? Are the counts consistent year over year or do they fluctuate to reflect the available talent?

Obviously there are limited nbr of 5 and 4 star athletes, but where are most of the HS talent ranked? No stars, 1-2 stars, 3 stars?

At work, they use a bell curve where 20% are above expectstions and 60% meet expectations.

I see headlines ststing this or thet star athlete is visiting but without some conext, not sure to be excited or worried?

I understands the stars dont make the athlete, so just keeping the discussion on star counts.

Hope this video answers your question.



Couple thoughts, wonder how many 4* lost their NFL opportunity getting buried in depth chart for a Blue Blood program.

Players should come to a program to get developed. Going to the right coaches makes a huge difference.

It was Interesting about inaccuracies for 5* and 4* transitioning to top NFL QB.

Star system did not exist during Brees and Brady era. I wonder what their star ratings would have been. Brees was probably 3*/2* coming out of HS from Austin (Probably because Brees did not have a prototype NFL QB frame). Brady might have been a 3* (4* ??).

 

[pboiler18]

Hope this video answers your question.

View embedded media

Couple thoughts, wonder how many 4* lost their NFL opportunity getting buried in depth chart for a Blue Blood program.

Players should come to a program to get developed. Going to the right coaches makes a huge difference.

It was Interesting about inaccuracies for 5* and 4* transitioning to top NFL QB.

Star system did not exist during Brees and Brady era. I wonder what their star ratings would have been. Brees was probably 3*/2* coming out of HS from Austin (Probably because Brees did not have a prototype NFL QB frame). Brady might have been a 3* (4* ??).

Brady was a high 4 star and a pretty big recruit

 

[cillerdo]

Brady was a high 4 star and a pretty big recruit

So they had star ratings then? I thought the ratings were fairly new.

I remember when Brady was deep in the depth chart behind Drew Henson. The one year Brady started he took Michigan to a bowl game against Alabama. It was a real good bowl game that went into OT.

 

[pboiler18]

So they had star ratings then? I thought the ratings were fairly new.

I remember when Brady was deep in the depth chart behind Drew Henson. The one year Brady started he took Michigan to a bowl game against Alabama. It was a real good bowl game that went into OT.

Henson was a top 10 recruit I believe and they promised him playing time to get/keep him. He wasn’t bad but he was definitely not better than Brady.

Brady was a solid get for them and I think a retrospective went back and ranked him and he was definitely in the top 250 of recruits in his class. He wasn’t an “under the radar” type by any means. He was just overshadowed by the Henson hype.

 

[rrdd2021]

Yes, I think we can agree that "stars" dont equate to "talent".

It's pretty darn close though. I'd have to guess that if you add up the number of roster stars that Georgia, Alabama, OSU are at the top. Those 3 might not win national and conference championships every year, but they're always in the talk and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

 

[Wolegib]

I remember that last Brady/Hensen year at Michigan. They would switch every other quarter. It was really stupid. A qb could be in the middle of a drive and hit the quarter and they would switch and lose momentum